But the bad end for Microsoft's controversial console does not stop there. The Xbox is officially less powerful than the PlayStation 4 -- about 30 percent less powerful to be precise. And it's officially $100 USD more expensive than Sony's PS4.

In short, Sony seems to have regained its PS1/PS2 kung fu, outmaneuvering its rival at nearly every turn.

Here's a quick comparison of how the consoles stack up:

*Note: PSN limits regifting of digital content, but there's no limit on (re)gifting discs -- as in you can give your friend a disc, they can give someone else that disc.

The specs paint a pretty picture for Sony and a pretty ugly one for Microsoft. But the controversies don't end there. In light of the recent spying efforts of the U.S. National Security Agency and revelation that Microsoft was one of the corporate partners cooperating with the spying, many are concerned about the 1080p Kinect camera on Microsoft's "always on" console -- despite Microsoft's insistence that it will include "robust" privacy protections.

Further, there's concern/rumors that it may take games a substantial amount of time to install on the Xbox One's hard drive. The mandatory hard drive installation was another penalty required to institute Microsoft's new sweeping digital rights management (DRM) scheme to help ban used games and check for unauthorized gifting/trades.

In short despite its incredible look voice controls and user interface, plus an impressive selection of first-party titles and exclusives, Microsoft's console is looking increasingly like a trainwreck in the making.

But currently priced at $359.99 USD, Nintendo and Sony could easily split the holiday sales crown if Nintendo drops its price a bit (say to $300 USD). Incoming 3D Mario, Mario Kart, and Super Smash Bros should give the Wii U a boost. While it lacks the powerful hardware of its counterparts, at a lower price point, it's unique tablet gameplay could win over some fans.

Please the Xbox will still sell fine. Yes they are shooting themselves in the foot though with the initial higher price. Same mistake Sony made last time. Who knows, they might adjust it before launch.

You guys seem to think everyone who buys this stuff looks into it as much as we do. They buy the one they know. Millions know the Xbox, care about their gamer score (stupid I know), want to play with their friends (which the Xbox has always been better at), etc.

Personally like I said I'm getting both but I do look forward to the TV stuff. Provided they don't raise the price of Xbox Live that is. If they did, then yeah I'd be done unless there was a huge change to justify the higher price (I'd gladly pay $10-15/mo for IPTV on my console).

You're right. People are stupid, and they don't think through their actions.

Buying an XBO is a massive disservice to the global gaming community though...because you're giving MS massive amounts of money to TAKE AWAY YOUR BASIC RIGHTS AS A CONSUMER.

You're setting a precedent. A very, very bad precedent. If the XBO succeeds, future consoles will follow suit - and not just from MS. It is crucial to the future of gaming that the XBO be an abject failure. Absolutely. Crucial.

Think that through. And if you still buy an XBO, you should be deeply ashamed of yourself.

The only redeeming aspect of DRM that could justify Microsoft's strategy if the DRM drives down the retail price of the games. Unfortunately this is probably not going to be the case at launch, because it if were Microsoft would probably be telling us about it now so quell the anger.

I wouldn't be quite so upset about DRM, it can definately be done right in a way that benifits both developers, distributors, and customers. Valve's Steam on the PC is a perfect example. That being said it can also be done wrong, EA's Origin is a perfect example. It all comes down to how Microsoft handles it and how it affects prices.

A single user licence is simply not worth as much as a potentially unlimitted user licence, and the XBO game prices absolutely need to reflect that. If XBO titles launch at say $45 while PS4 titles are the standard $60 I think many customers would prefer to buy that title on the XBO and would appreciate the benifit that DRM brings to the marketplace. It might even validate the higher console price.

Any and all plans to require any kind of fee, or any other interference at all (like "participating dealers") in the sale/trade/gifting of games are an abject abuse of the consumer, and the First-Sale Doctrine. I would hope that MS and every publisher connected to the XBO gets sued in a massive class-action lawsuit the instant that practice gets implemented.

As I've been saying, every XBO sale is a massive disservice to gamers worldwide - because ^that^ is the precedent you're setting.

And if you need me to explain that again, please just show yourself out. Even if everything else was in the XBO's favor, the catastrophic abuse of the consumer by violating the First-Sale Doctrine makes any and all people who speak in favor of the XBO absolute retards who should no longer be allowed to voice an "opinion" ever again.

I think you missed his point. Sony has the habit of telling you what you want to hear to make a sale and then after you make the purchase they'll just decide to change the rules. I'm very suspicious of the wording Sony has used up to this point.

That law covers physical media. The Disc itself is just the delivery medium for the Xbox One as to play it requires you to install to hard-disk. You're talking about a game license. Licenses can be non-transferable.

There's no legitimate use for our Air Force to be buying gaming consoles. Proof of concept?? Give me a break. You accomplish far more with traditional or purpose-built systems!!

Look I get the whole "Sony sucks" thing, I'm on that bandwagon too. But in this case we have to go with what we know, and that is the PS4 looks far stronger than the Xbox One in a lot of categories.

You're angry about the Linux thing or Sony's rep, yeah I get it. But simply saying "they did it before, they'll do it again" is speculation. Unless you have something more substantial to back it up, it comes off as trolling.

The Wii was underpowered compared to the 360/PS3 however a lot of games were released for all 3 consoles and they looked very similar. Either way the game play was the same across all 3 consoles and graphics cant save a bad game.

I have to wonder if anyone looked at the game previews Microsoft released showing off the X-Box one and thinks they are sub par? To me its like showing off the Radeon 6870 vs 7870. One gets higher frame rates but when your limited to 60fps there is no difference. At some point they will add some small visual differences that are available to them on the PS4 but most people wont care. It comes down to game play and no amount of graphics can save bad game development.

As for the air force at the time it probably made sense the consoles are generally sold at a loss hoping to make it back in game sales so for the price it probably made sense to do this instead of buying servers they got more power for less money. But lesson learned this is one of the cheaper gov mistakes.

I could care less about the linux pull however Sony did develop a history of saying what people want to hear then back tracking down the line. Did they learn a lesson? Doubtful because I recall very clearly how cass they were on losing client data and not giving a rats behind about it.

With that Ill probably get both consoles but Im thinking Microsoft will see all the resentment toward this and offer up suggestions to over protective game studios. I suspect they will test the waters and measure the fallout then decide if its worth it. Im well aware of whats being said up front from Microsoft and Im fine with it and thats my decision as a consumer. I cant resell my steam games and Im fine with that too.

I personally was thinking on switching consoles each generation and hoping for backwards compatibility. Like getting two console generations but no backwards this time around.

I'd expect that, at some point down the path, when new games reach hardware potential, XBO will be first to show unwelcome signs like frame rate drops below 30, screen tearing etc. Eventually games will be running on lower resolutions internally before being upscaled to 1080... but they will still be the same games.

Not angry about the linux thing, I never owned a PS3 even. I just find it disappointing people are putting their trust in Sony over a DRM issue. This is the company that has had some of the worst DRM abuse on record.

quote: That law covers physical media. The Disc itself is just the delivery medium for the Xbox One as to play it requires you to install to hard-disk. You're talking about a game license. Licenses can be non-transferable.

Nope. Even explicit verbiage in software licenses has been proven to be in violation of the First-Sale doctrine in court and thrown out.

You can sell/trade/gift used CDs. DVDs. Blu-Rays. VHS tapes. And, yes, video games. First. Sale. Doctrine. Learn it. It's one of the most important and most fundamental pillars of our economy.

And I got his point - his point is that Sony has used DRM in the past, and they will again in the future. I agree. But that's not the most important issue here. The brutal vivisection of the First-Sale Doctrine is a violation magnitudes higher than anything else that Microsoft has ever done.

Buy an XBO and you're setting a precedent that would, *literally*, provide the capability to undermine our entire economy. Because if we start giving up the rights granted by the First-Sale Doctrine on XBO games, PS games being next isn't the final problem. It's having the right to resell your car. Your house. Anything you own that was made by someone else.

Everybody who thinks that buying an XBO needs to seriously get a grip on reality. This isn't some nit-picky little annoyance we're talking about. Discarding the First-Sale Doctrine is a world-changing economic precedent that in *every* possible case ends in a worst-possible outcome for consumers.

The license is not tied to the disc. So yes, you can sale the disc, but the license is not automatically transferred with said disc. Most enterprise software already works this way. PC games work this way. I think we're just witnessing consoles turn into PCs.

That is unfortunate, but it's not the only case - and note that the issue isn't only with software. It's with CDs, movies, and frankly anything you buy that someone else holds IP for.

The EFF and others are good resources for this, and the recent Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc ruling may provide new insight into this as well - and also maybe help fix the first-sale issue for digital downloads in the USA as has been done in Europe.

The fact of the matter is that first-sale is a fundamental pillar of our economy...and if we as consumers allow video game publishers to eliminate it, we allow everybody to eliminate it.

First sale doctrine for 'licensed' software is already eliminated. The Supreme Court refused to revisit Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc., it is now up to Congress to re-establish first sale doctrine for 'licensed' software.

Tablets/smartphones have a different ecosystem and I believe a basic understanding everything is DLC. You don't get any sort of physical media, same as E-Books, you have the DLC but you don't own the physical book. With apps and games, the appreciable different in the DLC for mobile devices is that many of the apps/games are either free to use or extremely cheaper than its counterparts in the console/pc market.

Most of the DLC I've seen for consoles/pcs are full priced as physical media versions, so don't see the reason for accepting DLC, except for Steam.

Based on Linux Support on the PS3, Backwards Compatibility of the PS3, and the denial of lost customer data, and the sheer cass and arrogance of Sony staff for all of the above actions.

People have a real problem with Microsoft being UP FRONT and honest about POSSIBILITIES of this. Most of this is driven from the Game Studios not Microsoft.

Its just fun for some people to blame Microsoft for all their problems.

I havent had a failed X-Box 360 and I have multiple X-Box first generations as well. But Microsoft made good on the warranty up to 3 years while other companies swept similar bump gate issues under the rug and pretended they didn't happen. Ballmer and Microsoft MANNED UP and took responsibility. What did Sony do downplay what your personal information is worth? Sorry if I find Microsoft actions commendable.

I think people forgot why there was Linux on PS3 to begin with. It was originally a ploy by Sony to classify the PS3 as a computer and not a gaming device to skirt some tax in Europe. Linux sounded like a good idea since you can get people interested in programming on the cell CPU. When the tax loophole was closed and the threat of using Linux to break their DRM, that feature disappeared. It no longer made sense to continue that feature. The linux was gimped anyways. I for one didn't miss that feature.

No actually he does not need to relax. It's getting the word out as he is that will put the pressure for MS to stop it before it comes out, you see? Logical right? If everyone took a chill pill, then any company could do anything lol.

When he mentioned Linux, he was obviously referring to the fact that Sony offered this on PS3, then withdrew it completely with a later firmware update. ie. anything Sony say now is not proof they will never do it. XBO-like DRM is only a firmware update away.

However, I agree with what you said before - if XBO succeeds, then its the way everyone will go. We can be sure Sony will push out such an update if they see Microsoft getting away with it.

Similarly, Sony won't shoot themselves in the foot if they see XBO circling the toilet because of these "features." The best way to keep Sony from pushing out such an update is for them to see a competitor tank from doing it.

Wow, you are stuck on First sale... that dog has no legs when it comes to software. Hate the DRM all you want, nobody likes it. The fact of the matter is modern console games just cost too damn much to make for the publisher to not impliment some form of protection for their work. Be it physical (disc) or software (DRM) every method has its ups and downs. Of course the ever expanding "freemium", ad-supported, or subscription methods are also availible (and still a form of DRM).. Just imagine Halo where you walk up to the warthog and get a transaction dialog.. $5 please Or maybe viagra side bars and product placement oh yea! And remember for just $5 a month Halo gold+ members get 20 free super plasma grenades each week!

quote: Wow, you are stuck on First sale... that dog has no legs when it comes to software.

Your ignorance is deafening. First-Sale doctrine rules everything. Even software. Even software that has a contract saying can't resell it...because that contract doesn't stand up in court, if it comes to that. If it violates First-Sale, it's an invalid contract.

Autodesk retained title to the software and imposed significant transfer restrictions: it stated that the license is nontransferable, the software could not be transferred or leased without Autodesk’s written consent, and the software could not be transferred outside the Western Hemisphere. The SLA also imposed use restrictions against the use of the software outside the Western Hemisphere and against modifying, translating, or reverse-engineering the software, removing any proprietary marks from the software or documentation, or defeating any copy protection device. Furthermore, the SLA provided for termination of the license upon the licensee’s unauthorized copying or failure to comply with other license restrictions. Thus, because Autodesk reserved title to Release 14 copies and imposed significant transfer and use restrictions, we conclude that its customers are licensees of their copies of Release 14 rather than owners.

CTA was a licensee rather than an 'owner of a particular copy' of Release 14, and it was not entitled to resell its Release 14 copies to Vernor under the first sale doctrine. 17 U.S.C. § 109(a). Therefore, Vernor did not receive title to the copies from CTA and accordingly could not pass ownership on to others. Both CTA’s and Vernor’s sales infringed Autodesk’s exclusive right to distribute copies of its work. Id. § 106(3).

Those have to do with "buycheapsoftware dot com" - one of untold numbers of online vendors who buy OEM copies of various kinds of software - including Windows - and resell them under First-Sale doctrine law. It's legal...those companies are plentiful, and wide out in the open. Likewise with used video games and other software at places even like Micro Center and BBY - not to mention other products like CDs and DVDs.

How about for once we, as consumers, stood up for and defended our interests? As opposed to just rolling over and letting Microsoft (or whoever) just do whatever they want to us?

So, yes...First-Sale has stuck in court for software even when the "license" argument has come up.

Obviously the industry would like to make that not so. The publishers are very angry that consumers have rights. They would like very much for consumers to have no rights of ownership for the software (or other) products they buy. So I'm sure the court cases will keep coming - which is why I've said numerous times that I sincerely hope there's a massive class-action lawsuit against Microsoft the instant the XBO comes out because of it's interference in the First-Sale Doctrine.

All this is before you agree to the term of licensing though, after which you are bound to them. Hardly anybody will ever actually sale you software, they'll license it to you and that license may be transferable through gifting or selling. If you don't own the software you do not have the automatic right to sale it.

I see you ignored the links I provided showing court cases that provide the basis for 3rd parties to buy and sell software, including OEM software, and which do so all over the internet and are even used by government agencies to source software from.

The evidence you're wrong is all around you - used software and video games for sale by countless internet vendors, Gamestop, Micro Center, BBY, etc. CDs, DVDs, etc.

I skimmed them. I have a problem for one with them being dated 2000,2001. A lot has happened since then in court proceedings. I didn't read any mention of used software in any of the articles. The OEM reselling just seems obvious, it's treated just like all new software in which you can sale to anybody, or give it away. Again I didn't see any mention of used software.

No, you're just talking about something that's not even up for debate and applying it to other circumstances. Look at Title 17, section 109, and subsection (b)(1)(a). Most importantly...

unless authorized by the owners of copyright in the sound recording or the owner of copyright in a computer program (including any tape, disk, or other medium embodying such program), and in the case of a sound recording in the musical works embodied therein, neither the owner of a particular phonorecord nor any person in possession of a particular copy of a computer program (including any tape, disk, or other medium embodying such program), may, for the purposes of direct or indirect commercial advantage, dispose of, or authorize the disposal of, the possession of that phonorecord or computer program

There is an exception for a computer that is used for the purpose of playing video games, basically protecting the reselling of console games at this time, however the Xbox One runs a full blown OS as well, so it wouldn't fit into this category. Its playing by the same rules a PC plays by.

And as I've comprehensively shown, used PC software can be bought and sold as well with court rulings enforcing First-Sale rights over the license verbiage.

Buy a Windows license from one of those online vendors, and it's used. It came off a Dell PC or something else for one reason or another. And it's perfectly legal. And even government agencies buy software from those companies.

Newegg doesn't do that because it deals only in the original-sale market...and because it wants to keep MS, Adobe, etc. happy. All these other online vendors, like the one that won the ruling against Adobe that I linked, deal in the second-hand market and what they are doing is buying and selling used, second-hand software. Period. End of story.

No, the specific issue you linked to was bundled software. Instead of bundling the software together on amachine they just sold off the pieces of software directly to customers. This is an entirely different scenario than you believe. Then was no use of this software prior to selling it.

That is the ruling that is used as the basis of that industry. They *do* buy and sell used software, including used OEM software such as Windows, that had originally been assigned to major OEM hardware.

And it's legal. And MS et al don't even challenge them in court. And government agencies buy from them.

While removing Linux from the PS3 was a dick move what's your issue with backwards compatibility?

If you bought an early model PS3 you still get full BC.

Sony removed the feature from newer models because people wanted the console to be cheaper (it worked once BC was removed causing a price drop sales exploded) but Sony never removed BC from those who payed for it.

People just flat out don't care. The amount of people who will actually be affected by a 24 hour online check-in is microscopic. And these people tend to be lower revenue drivers for Microsoft. 24 hour check-in is far better than we've seen from PC games that require always-on to play at all.

The used game ban is alarming but it is no more restrictive than PC gaming has been for 15+ years. The sharing options are substantially more restrictive than the previous generation but still much more open than you can get with a PC. The PS4 is quasi maintaining status quo but Sony isn't exactly a company known for keeping its promises. Remember Linux and backward compatibility?? Remember rootkit? We're talking about Sony here. You realize that?

Then you have the games. Everything Microsoft is doing is to lure publishers to make games for the Xbox One. If the Xbox One has a substantially better catalog of games than the PS4 it won't matter what type of online requirements or used game bans are in place. Gamers buy consoles to play games.

The amount of hate on forums for EA is incredible. Yet when Sim City comes out people buy the shit out of it. And they bitched and bitched endlessly about the server problems. And they vowed to boycott EA. And then EA/Dice give a teaser of Star Wars Battlefront and people forgot that they hate EA.

Point is, you can bitch and moan all you want and call consumers stupid but come if the Xbox One has a superior game lineup at launch don't be surprised to see it leading in sales.

While I really wanted to vote you up, I dont think it would have made a difference.

People dont realize that console companies make gamming consoles to make money. Sony didnt make the PS4 for you, and MS didnt make the XBOX1 for me. They made them to make money. And it truly comes down to price and games.

I enjoy how skewed the article was making it seem like PS4 is better based on an arbitrary list of unknowns. "Here is a 'spec sheet' of a bunch of policies and procedures" Seriously?

No mention of cloud computing, no mention of TV integration, No mention of Windows integration. Skype? IE?

To be honest this whole thing is a big joke. A writer for this sight might as well post a 'spec sheet' comparison of atheism vs catholicism.

1-95% of games will be made for Xbox - PS4 - PC. If they're not locked on PS4 why would the game publisher lock it on the Xbox?

2-This DRM shit has been going on for a while in the PC industry if you download your games directly via steam. What happened? Prices dropped. Games are consistently on sales, i got Batman for 2,95$! PEOPLE DON'T MAGICALY SPEND MORE MONEY ONCE YOU BAN USED GAMES. THE ECONOMIC DEMAND STAYS THE SAME. IN FACE OF INCREASED COMPETITION FOR YOUR LIMITED DOLLARS' PRICES DROP. Basic economic 101. Ok 102 may be.

3-Games are moving away from discs and toward download only model, if not streaming from affar (Nvidia shield). What will the PS4 do in 5 years?

4-I said it elsewhere, buy a AMD Trinity + Radeon 7850 PC and you'll get as much power as a PS4.

I am not a fan of digital distribution of any kind, because in the USA there appears to be no rights at all for the consumer regarding digital downloads - as opposed to Europe, where they've firmly established First-Sale doctrine rights for digital products as well as physical.

People often say that they're not bothered by the fact that they can't resell their Steam games because they paid less for them in the first place. Personally that doesn't work for me, because although you may have paid $30 for a game instead of $50, the fact is you still paid $30 for something that you now have no rights for.

But games are only as cheap as they are because there is no secondary used games market. Because a chunk of EVERY sale goes to the developer, it better supports the developers and their future titles with more money.

If the choice is between the ability to resell my steam games or support the developers with more money and more sales, I will choose the latter every time.

More money for devs = better titles, lower prices, more sales (as in going on sale, not necessarily more actual sales).

During the steam sales, I'm able to get 2-3 entire franchises of games for less than what gamestop sells a single used game for, except now all the money I just spent goes to the developers (after valve's small cut). I think I got the entire assassin's creed franchise for like $30, and all of the Prince of Persia games for something like $15. This beats out used games any day of the week, and cannot happen if the digital licenses are transferable.

quote: Because a chunk of EVERY sale goes to the developer, it better supports the developers and their future titles with more money.

Go ahead and repeat that for CDs, DVDs, Blu-Rays, eBooks, so on and so forth, and see if you still think you're making sense. Do you realize you're begging for the corporations to take your ownership rights away from you?

Do you realize you are asking them to drive up costs to account for the fact that every resell of an existing piece of media gives them no money?

If a better model was currently in place for music TV, movies, and books that don't allow such easy redistribution, you would infact see lower prices and more fire sales of the content.

I understand your concern about not being able to buy the product and resell it to make money back. Perfect sense. But if it is known ahead of time that this is not allowed, then there is no issue. If people don't like it, then they should stop buying the products. Obviously steam has proven that most people would prefer the low prices and sales over the ability to resell their games.

TBH, if they sell all the games for $20-30 with no resell rights then I would have no problems. But if they're going to charge me $60+ and use all these retarded DRM restricting me from selling it then it's unacceptable.

I honestly think they would actually make more money selling cheaper games.

Let's say it cost them $50m a game. They'll sell it for $25 and make only $15 on each after paying for everything. $15 x 5m = $75mIf they used an online distribution method, they would actually get more than $15 back.Selling 5m copies isn't hard these days especially at fire sale prices.

I know for a fact that what keeps most people from buying a new game is price. $60 is still quite high. I found myself and all my friends buying $10-30 games just to try it out. At $60, it is not even worth buying the games we anticipated.

I really don't see why MS, Sony and developers isn't lowering the prices of games. There's a few hundred million gamers now. They should sell way more to lower their contribution margin per unit. The MSRP wouldn't hurt them.

People dont realize games are software. Software is nebulous. If I write a peice of code and that code shows up in a different software program I have the right to sue, but what if that company bought my software? Do they have rights to use that code?

The only reason you think you have rights is because it took a while for people to be able to cheaply get around the physical media. When I was 8, there was no internet, and the poeple figuring out how to hack Nintendo Roms where engineers. Now highschool kids and younger are reverse engineering software as long as they have a computer.

These rights are things you never had. You own the media, not the code, not the game. DMCA specifically states you are buying a licence, thats been held up in courts for CD's, Software, Movies, ect.

You are spreading misinformation, and if you dont believe me then sue MS and tell me how that goes.

Software isn't nebulous. It's been proven in court that "license" verbiage in the contract doesn't preclude people from buying and reselling that software.

The digital thing has f%cked American consumers so far, but not Europeans - their courts have ruled to show that digital purchases have the same First-Sale rights as physical purchases. It's only Americans that are taking it in the a$s on that.

I am spreading fact. If you don't believe me, ask MS why they hae never done anything about the resale of their software via countless vendors on the internet. It's because they can't - it's perfectly legal because of First-Sale. And the same holds true for CDs, DVDs, Blu-Rays, etc. You have the right to buy and sell those products. The only thing you don't have the right to do is to defeat the DRM to make a copy. If your assertion was true, how do you explain all the used CD/DVD stores all over the place? Let alone Gamestop?

Sorry - the reality around you obviously demonstrates that you're wrong.

Well the Xbox is more expensive because of included Kinect 2.0 camera. It would have been 150$ if sold separately.Same as PS3 with blu ray, itm did make that console very expensive in the beginning. Now blu-ray players are cheap. Within time the Kinect 2.0 will become cheaper to produce, so will the price of Xbox One. Is the Xbox One price diffence a worth of it because of Kinect 2.0 camera... propably not, but who knows, maybe it will be better supported this time bacause it is basic feature with each Xbox One consoles... but only maybe...

I'm 42 and I want a media box that can also play games. For me thats the Xbox One.

The second hand games and 24 hour connectivity dont affect me at all.

I'm sure I'm not the only one that now uses his 360 for 90% media and just 10% gaming. It was very different in 2006 but now gaming is not so important for me.

I think MS has made the right box for a lot of people, just not the hardcore gamers. But then the money nowadays isnt in games is it! MS know the money is in media subscriptions and tieing it all in with the big media companies.

quote: Please the Xbox will still sell fine. Yes they are shooting themselves in the foot though with the initial higher price. Same mistake Sony made last time. Who knows, they might adjust it before launch.

The price isn't the issue so much as it is Microsoft attempting to undermine or kill the used game market and devalue previously purchased games. They're betting that people "love" the Xbox so much that they're going to go buy the "upgraded" versions of the old games they used to like.

quote: You guys seem to think everyone who buys this stuff looks into it as much as we do. They buy the one they know. Millions know the Xbox, care about their gamer score (stupid I know), want to play with their friends (which the Xbox has always been better at), etc.

True, the xbox has cornered the online play element as far as consoles go, but they didn't do anything that Sony is incapable of doing if they play their hand wisely. Previous success is no guarantee of future success - see SEGA and more recently, Nintendo.

quote: Personally like I said I'm getting both but I do look forward to the TV stuff. Provided they don't raise the price of Xbox Live that is. If they did, then yeah I'd be done unless there was a huge change to justify the higher price (I'd gladly pay $10-15/mo for IPTV on my console)

Honestly I could care less about that add-on crap. I want a console that, first and formost, plays games and plays them well. I want an excellent first-party library and not a bunch of cross-platform mouth-breather oriented FPS and sports games. Historically, the PS library has always been a bit more diverse since you have a broader swath of developers making games for it.

I do not need to choose one; I could buy both, but I will not because I don't want the clutter and I don't have the time to sit around playing games as much as I used to.

Both boxes are waiting to be hacked so either Linux or Android can be loaded and bye-bye to the original OS of these boxes and the controls associated to it. From a technical viewpoint, I would assume XB One is easier to hack and pretty sure within 2 weeks, a loadable Linux distribution would be working on that. A $500 mini superComputer anyone ?.The PS4 would likely be used as a GPU server when hacked to service games streamed to tablets. An el-cheapo VCX would be a nice thing to have especially when it can render Android games at highest resolution a tablet can handle.

Win8? I'd go further back to Vista. The XBOX One is becoming the gaming divisions "Vista" which will keep people on XBOX 360 (like Vista did for Windows XP) or force them to move to the competition (PS4) much like Vista pushed some people to Mac's.

You're just using Windows 8 wrong. Microsoft says the new interface is better and you like ads and buying software from them only giving them a fat cut of the sales. You also don't need multi monitor support.

The Xbox One simply does more than the PS4. Additionally, the Xbox One's compute capabilities are dynamic vs. the PS4's static capabilities. The Xbox One supports offloading compute tasks to the xbox cloud. So as the cloud scales in power, so does the Xbox One.

A hell of a lot of influence from people with very large wallets looking to make them fatter. PS4 is clearly listening to the gamer rich and poor. Ultimately it will win the vote of the majority. I myself will choose the PS4 for it's TFLOPS and faster RAM. Maybe you could even swap the HDD like before. Price is the cherry. AMD is really cashing in on this battle. Maybe they'll take out Intel with this crazy contract.

But wasn't the PS3 suppose to be faster than the Xbox 360? I know a lot of cross-platform games suffered slower frame rates on PS3. It will come down to how games are developed for the Xbox One. I think the killer is the price difference.

...granted that it's eminently clear that only a sociopath would buy an XBox Done over a PS4 (because of the message that would send the industry - "go ahead and take away our rights for no reason, we'll still buy your crap"), I admit I am unclear about what the "gifting limit" is that's referenced for the PS4.

"I admit I am unclear about what the "gifting limit" is that's referenced for the PS4."

Digital content associated with a game is what is restricted on the PS4. You buy a game, then buy some digital DLC.. like a map pack or something. You can give the disc away but there will be restrictions on gifting the DLC.

You can be a real piece of work Moto. What in heaven's name is the difference between DLC and a Game? (Hint: you associate ownership with physical media possession.) It's software, period. Either it's draconian and against first sale doctrine by preventing the resell of ANY software or it's not, full stop. If you're going to run around these forums and insult anyone who has the slightest of different opinions from yourself at least have the balls and brains to be consistent.

You paid $X for the game, and you sell it for $Y. The DLC you bought isn't attached to that game...therefore it doesn't go with it.

There's nothing inconsistent there. 2 different purchases. And unlike Europe, the US has little to no rights for transfers of digital purchases...whereas the physical game is covered by the First-Sale Doctrine.

So it's OK that you can resell the game but not being able to transfer DLC ownership is OK because it's a separate purchase? This goes against everything you've been spewing so far. Regardless of it being a different purchase, locking the DLC to a particular console is the same type of DRM you are voting against.

By your logic in your very post I'm replying to, the Xbox one doesn't have any issues because games will be sold as digital licenses, and therefore "has little to no rights for transfers of digital purchases"

No, it doesn't. They are 2 separate purchases...period. Selling one doesn't mean the other goes with it. And the DLC isn't locked to a console...it's locked to the person who bought it, just like your iTunes library, which is DRMd up the a$s, is locked to you personally - not one iPod.

Also, as I've already noted, the US has much weaker protections for digital goods than Eurpoe does. There's plenty of precedent in Europe for First-Sale rights on digital purchases - but not in the US. It's wrong for the US to be this way, but maybe we'll get that fixed like Europe did.

1) Game is sold to you as a physical disc. You own it. DLC (secondary purchase) is locked to the person == perfectly OK!

2) Game is sold to you as a digital license in a digital store == OMG horrible, no used game support this is evil.

You have every right to complain, but please be consistent. Buying DLC separately from the original game is not any different than buying the game itself just because it's not a physical disc. The same concept applies as Xbox One's DRM scheme through digital licensing.

The DLC is not protected under First-Sale rights in the USA as it is elsewhere.

You're still able to resell the original game.

If you want to claim you're interpreting that as me "being OK" with it, then that's your problem. I am categorically not "OK" with it, but being aware of the lack of First-Sale rights in the USA for digital downloads, I know there's nothing that can be done about it.

Everyone seems to forget that the XBox One includes cloud computing so that it can offload a portion of the compute workload to the XBox Cloud. This distribution of computing can continue to scale as more cloud computing and software refinements are introduced. With the PS4, you have static compute capabilities.

.... here I am not thinking of a on-line MP game that has lost popularity, where the game servers are shutting down. I am thinking of the Single-Player game, or the SP component of a SP/MP game, or a locally-hosted LAN-MP game.

Will the EULA of such a game specify that Microsoft will always provide the (DRM)-authentication, to insulate against a game distributor or developer going out of business, or capriciously shutting down the authentication server?? And what about the day the XFlopOne is replaced by the non-compatible XBiggerFlop2. Will MS continue the XFlopOne game authentication support? Console users have become accustomed to the lack of backward compatibility and keep their old machine(s) to play previous-generation games. However, in the case of the XFlopOne, retaining the hardware may not be enough... thanks to the DRM.

The sooner MS totally gives up their DRM nonsense on locally-playable games for the XFlopOne, the better it will be for their financial future.

You know the online check for the console is literally just a firmware update away? In ten years or so, the ability to to that to this machine will be so widespread it won't even be funny(assuming microsoft doesn't get off its ass and removes the 24 hours check first) I mean hell, the biggest issues will be the games that require U-play, or Origins, or the Blizzard servers, or Sony's servers, or whatever to connect to that can't anymore.

All that Matters, is that neither one of these consoles will be ready for the next evolution. 3.5 Years to design. 8 YEARS, the both of them, to give us these.

We already have access to $1200 Ultra HD TV's. YES, they are not top of the line, actually BOTTOM, BUT!!!! They do Indeed display very, VERY!! Good. What does this mean.1st TIME in Computer Gaming History, that we have Generation OLD, Video Cards that actually can run Games at ULTRA Resolution, ULTRA Quality IE, are more advanced than the Monitors that will soon hit..

IE-- By end of next year, their FIRST of 8 (in comparison). PC Gamers will have the ability to run 4K Resolution, ULTRA quality games. OF course Monitors will plummet in price. OF course, after a set number of Monitors have been sold, you will see a Bump IN the games, QUALITY Wise, in order to run at 4K, ULTRA Quality.

Consoles, Will never have enough time to do that. By the time Either Console maker, comes out with ANYTHING.. to do 4K.. PC Gaming, will indeed take off, AND- A different Console maker, will emerege with 4K, console games.

Will take 2-3 Tick\TOCK's for Intel to catch up to 4K GAMING GPU's., and Amd.. Displaying a movie= BIG DEAL.. BUT GAMING, well that will be the game changer.

Weve been through this, ALOT over the years. 1080P, Had finally caught on. First on the PC Level, then swiftly moved to commercial TV's (Economically priced that is). That was Xbox's \ PS4, First taste of the Video Resolution Game. I dont think they are prepared for this type of game.

PS4 will be my choice. Higher TFLOPS, faster RAM, better controller alll with a lower price and used game abilities as a cherry on top. Used games is the backbone of my gaming career. Who wants to pay premium for a piece of crap game that you can't get rid of. Thus tells me that Sony is listening to the avid gamer rich and poor. The one who is really gaining from either victor in this "Battle" is AMD. Maybe they'll get the money to build an awesome cheap CPU that out-does Intel from these huge contracts.

The deal has been sealed for me for a while. PS4 it is, go play in a corner Xbox, you are DOA and will be HATED by gamers, utterly hated. My rage against MS these days is unequaled. First the crap that was Win8, they killed off some software I used, then Xboc One bomb.... sheesh, they are dead.

quote: In short despite its incredible look voice controls and user interface, plus an impressive selection of first-party titles and exclusives, Microsoft's console is looking increasingly like a trainwreck in the making.

Actually there's nothing particularly special about XB's look, voice, or UI. In fact, if one looks at the failure of metro on the desktop and in mobile, it becomes clear that the UI is a negative not a positive.

As far as Kinect goes, it's just a standard motion controller affair. I know many people who have one and they are sitting in some draw or cupboard somewhere gathering dust. In short, not many people actually use them. The fact that it bumps the price of the XB another $100 compared to the PS4 is unforgivable.

Microsoft has well and truly XBOned itself here. The XBOne has absolutely no redeeming qualities what so ever for gamers. It's a product designed by bean counters to extract as much money out of people as possible. Even accessing Netflix requires a $60 a year subscription. How crazy is that?

It sounds more and more likely that I'm going to stick with my Xbox 360. I haven't forgiven Sony for their shenanigans. And I'm not about to pay more for a crippled entertainment device that can be used to spy on my household. The opposing argument that there are checks and balances on that sort of power have been discredited with the recent domestic spying news.

I can't help but feel like this is playing out to be great teaching example to be put into Marketing textbooks on how not launch a product...

Microsoft has research and marketing resources that any company would kill to have, yet the product launch of the Xbox One is looking ugly at best. While we don't know what the specific management breakdowns are at at this point... being it big egos/unrealistic expectations, group think, or overconfidence, but there must be some classic human failures going on in Redstone. We'll probably see a Harvard Business Review article before long...

I've had and XBox since the original model, but this is it. I will not buy an XB1 and I will tell anyone who asks not to buy one either. I would wager that I am responsible for over 400 gamers for buying an XBox 360. Now Sony can get that money.

Thank God for Sony and THANK YOU SONY. You delivered gaming box that is more powerful, less expensive and also free of the DRM stupidity. BRAVO Sony. Only moron and completely uninformed customer will go for your competitor product.Thank you for being CONSUMER ORIENTED. Thank you for choice that let us show what we think about recent direction of the Redmond giant.

XBox is doooooomed. There's no possible way I would buy that over the PS4 right now, not a single chance. PS4 sounds pretty good, I'm definately going that route even though I have an Xbox now. Sorry MS, you F'd up BIG time, again.... Freaking stupid Win8 start screen, metro apps and start menu shitstorm of crap. I can't work with that POS.

The Xbox is more than just a gaming console like the PS4, it is a full home media server. I use my Xbox 360 to watch movies more than playing games. It has Netflix, Hulu, and Xbox Live to download all movies and TV shows available. The Xbox One will connect to you cable now. You can also hook your home network, so I can watch torrents residing on my PC.

Also, the Xbox One has many more features than the PS4, for instance you have the ability to play without a controller, unlike the PS4.

Why does Daily Tech always focus on the negative when it comes to Microsoft? I detect a major anti-Microsoft bias on this site.

Its not an all in one device. It just connects to your DVR and Satellite as a middleman. Now you can use the Xbox One as a universal remote! Probably assuming they add proper compatibility instead of telling you you're using it wrong. Or just get a Logitech remote that's compatible with everything and cheaper.

Also the PS4 will do Netflix and I'm sure a few other services. Digital distribution is kind of a big deal now. Even the PS3 does this.

unopened game- same limits apply- give gift- they get game - no worries

OPENED GAME you are gifting to a Friend- ie a game you PLAYED.

PS4....give game to friend, they play, they can then gift it to another friend, or give it back.

One...give game to friend ONLY if they have been on your friends list for a minimum of 30 days, then they have to activate it, install it, then they can NEVER give that game away to another friend OR give it back to YOU.

I don't see the PS4 offering anything compelling but gaming. I want to replace my home theater PC and my cable box (well, I already did with a Ceton, but pretend I have a cable box too) with one box.

Microsoft will always have an advantage in that arena.

The DRM fear-mongering is just the usual nonsense we hear from angry basement dwellers every time a new technology comes out. HDMI - OMG it will be so onerous! BluRay OMG they are taking us's rightsies! TPM, OMG they will pwn our computersies!

It's all a bunch of childishness. The practical differences between the DRM on the PS4 and Xbox One will be minimal.

Maybe if PC games arbitrarily cost $60 regardless of their content it would better simulate the console customer experience that he craves so much.

Seriously though, PC gaming on a coach is amazing. Playing Nimbus on a 10' projection screen with a Bluetooth controller is particularly awesome. And it really doesn’t cost that much to build a modest gaming PC these days.

You can't possibly tell me a PC is simpler to use. If PC was as simple as a console then it would actually be more popular. Most people don't want to deal with drivers, troubleshoot, windows, etc... even though the gaming experience is better.

I've never had a single PC store bought of any kind with updated software out of the box. Nobody I know does either. It's a known fact that the first thing you do is update all your software and take out all the junkware.

I don't even know why you're fighting this. PC has a variety of hardware that a software has to be compatible with while consoles are fixed. That alone tells you there will always be more problems with PCs.

Let's not even get into price. $400 will not get you anything to game on unless it's used and probably with no monitor.

Did it stop me from PC gaming? no, but most of my friends would rather just have a console. There's nothing wrong with that.

* no abusive desecration of the First-Sale Doctrine* no requirement to be online* 30% better hardware capability* $100 cheaper

If you buy an XBox Done you deserve a punch in the face and a kick in the nuts. Because every sale of that device is a letter to the entertainment industry that taking away our rights is OK so long as we can play the 40th-billion FPS game that was ever made.

I find it safe to say that anyone who buys an XBox Done over a PS4 not only deserves to be publicly mocked, but really needs to be - every person who buys an XBox Done has done a MASSIVE disservice to the rest of us.

Last I checked the games make the GAME console and both will have great fun games. But to declare victory based on the specs is just silly.

I certainly believe the PS4 is a better deal but to put the X-Box One as down an out and have a list on the site that clearly omits the media center abilities of the console is just being biased and uninformative.

"* no abusive desecration of the First-Sale Doctrine* no requirement to be online* 30% better hardware capability* $100 cheaper"

Exactly..."If you buy an XBox Done you deserve a punch in the face and a kick in the nuts."

LOL... I dont know about that. If you are someone that uses Kinect alot, or one of the other features that Xbox has, then I could see it. But MS has made a huge mistake this time. The price can and will be modified, the hardware isnt a huge issue, but the DRM/online requirement will bite them in the arse. It's absolutely rediculous and it WILL stop a hell of alot of people from buying it over the PS4.

I really dont like Sony and would rather not buy anything from them, but it at the time of release, MS doesnt fix the used game policy, I am out. Sorry MS, bad choice by you.

the PS4 is considerably more powerful and has considerably more memory bandwidth than the xbox one, so from a purely hardware point of view it is indeed better.

the terms of use are also much less restrictive on PS4.on top of that, the xbox' kinect system spies on users. it sends data about their TV viewing habits (including the number of people in the room) to MS, which then presumably shares it with its content partners. this is quite literally big brother, right on your screen (or just slightly above it).

even if the xbox had the better hardware, i still wouldn't buy it simply because i am not a slave to MS or a media corporation (or any corporation, for that matter). and who is in my living room and when is entirely MY business, not bill gates'.

quote: on top of that, the xbox' kinect system spies on users. it sends data about their TV viewing habits (including the number of people in the room) to MS, which then presumably shares it with its content partners. this is quite literally big brother, right on your screen (or just slightly above it).

Good god, and you probably believe that the Fluoride int he water in America is so that the government can use mind control.

The difference in network traffic on my network has changed exactly 0.000% from when I didn't have a kinect, to when I did. How exactly is it sending any information if it isn't transmitting it over my network?

The "amount of people in the room" was a patent application, not an actual function. Go read the inquirer article again, this time, without letting your emotions rise up and throttle your higher brain functions.

Time will tell what the true difference is. Yes the PS4 will be capable of better graphics at a higher framerate. That's not what makes great games though.

Both consoles will have good games. The PS4 just has the ability for them to be prettier. Honestly graphics are already largely good enough. I just want more things on screen, better physics, etc. Yes it takes GPU power to do the former. The latter is still largely accomplished by the CPU and both are roughly equivalent there.

Ultimately, the next 12 months will be exciting for gaming. Microsoft showed some pretty cool exclusives. Sony did as well. Then there's the independent titles like AC4 and Destiny which look amazing (especially Destiny).

quote: Yes the PS4 will be capable of better graphics at a higher framerate. That's not what makes great games though.

So true, GAMEPLAY is what makes a better game.

Honestly, looking at both conferences, based on Ryse, and Forza, and Halo, and the MGS videos they showed(all of which except halo was in engine, and showed gameplay) the graphics on the One are currently better looking, if that really means anything. I mean, they were damn near live action looking on the One, everything Sony showed was very cartoony.

so if thats the only thing you base winning on, then at the moment, from evidence, Xbox One wins.

Price wise, PS4 wins.

Games wise, well, we don't know do we? We know of 15 exclusives for Xbox One, 7 new franchises, but Sony didn't really mention theirs. Note: In terms of console exclusives, neither company has counted a game that is only on their console and on the computer as a non exclusive game. They only count em as non exclusive if they are on two or more consoles.This one? Depending on which exclusives you want, either could win, I call it a Draw.

Controller wise, I personally like the Xbox controllers, since I have what I like to think are average size hands, and the Sony controllers are too small, and give me cramps. On top of that, Xbox games are very standardized as concerns controller layouts, whereas in my experience, PS layouts are all over the place, you might have a trigger(r2) for shooting a gun/attacking in one game, the bumper(r1) in another, and x in another. Not to mention all the rest of the buttons could be completely randomized game to game.So in that category, for me at least, Xbox wins.

for the current generation, PS3 seemed to be all about semi-interactive movies, which, if you like em, is great, but me personally, I want to spend more time PLAYING and less time watching my games.In that category, to me, Xbox Wins.

Voice/gesture functionality through the Kinect is hit or miss, depending on what volume you have the game at,and the light levels in the room. but voice/gesture functionality on the PS3 even with Eye Toy is damn near nonexistent. Maybe this will get better in the next generation, but I see it getting MUCH better for the Xbox One much faster, as Kinect is now a standard component(meaning everyone who buys an Xbox One will have one) as opposed to an add on that only the most hardcore gotta have everything types will own on the PS4.for voice/gesture capability, Xbox wins this one, but it's not a huge feature yet, so to me, not that important.

Media capability. Basically, Sony has said "Look, it's the PS3 version 2!" which means that yes, some media capability is there, but it wasn't very useful with my current setup on my PS3, and they Didn't talk about any improvements to it for the PS4. Xbox360 however, integrates quite well with my network(media extender for my Server, allows it to view TV over my network due to the networked tuners attached to the server, and read movies/music off the server directly) Xbox One is announced to improve upon these capabilities immensely.Xbox wins here

Honestly, only time is going to tell who "wins" because no matter how many things I or anyone else compares on the system, there will always be people who bring something up we missed or didn't care about(like the TFLOPS, which, considering the PS3 was SOOO much better in terms of raw power, didn't make a crap worth of difference to anyone, cause really, most games are/were 720p and upscaled on both consoles, the 360 just did it better for some reason)

Buying an XBox Done is sending a message, loud and clear, to the industry that our rights aren't important and we're OK with them trampling all over them.

I said above it's a sociopathic thing to do...and it is. Every XBO sale is a massive disservice to the gaming community worldwide. Because *you're* the one setting the precedent that your rights as a consumer are so unimportant that you'll pay MS to take them away.

The only rights I have to a product I purchase when software is concerned are those that the seller gives me. Buying software doesn't mean you own it. You are licensing it in accordance with the terms of service and use that they provide. If I don't like them, then I won't buy it.

It is not Microsoft's terms that will stop me from trading or selling a game I bought. It will be the company I bought it from. As far as selling, I never sell games so that is of little concern. I care about being able to take the game to a friends house. I almost always log into my Xbox Live profile when I do, so again, usually minimal impact. But I do like the ability to.

Feel free to continue your rant though. What's amazing is you are speaking less about the Kinect being required than you are about the used game part. That is the part I care more about. And I am largely reserving my judgement on that until the console actually launches as we won't really know the real deal on that until that time. I don't plan to buy one day 1 anyway so I can figure out what the deal is on it. If it has to be connected all the time and is shown to not be turned off when I say it should be, then yes, I won't buy one. If it can be fully disabled and is proven to be (you know there will be people checking), then I'll buy one.

I may end up also getting both (and maintaining a high end gaming PC), but I will definitely be getting the PS4 before the XBOX and it could also go the way of not getting it at all.

I have both the current generation consoles, but only the PS3 is really getting any use over the last couple of years and whit all the new amazing games coming to the PS3 it is likely to keep being the case.

Meh.. you do realize that in legal terms that unless you wrote it yourself you can't "own" software. You own a license to use the software. The contract you agree to when you open the box or click accept limits what you can and can't do with that license. (almost all have provisions against resale) It has been thus and will always be thus.

Microsoft here has messed up royaly with this DRM scheme. IMHO it should have been whoever owns the disk can play the game and that the game can work from you account without the disk so long as you are connected and nobody else is using your disk. I think an option for continuing to play without the disk should be availible but then typical Steam like DRM rules should apply.

Online requirements have been a part of games for a long time, the console itself requiring it is new though for me at least it really depends on what I am getting for it. Hondestly I find this more of a PR fail as MS should have given a demonstration on just what cloud compute can do for the XB1.

30% may make a differience or may make none whatsoever at this point who knows there are too many differiences in the platforms for a raw number comparison to be useful. I am sure at some point someone will make a cross platform game where you can really tell but until then meh...

$100 cheaper... this one will kill the XB1 more than DRM or the PS4 pushing slightly more polygons. I have no idea what crack they were smoking when they thought $500 is acceptible.

quote: Meh.. you do realize that in legal terms that unless you wrote it yourself you can't "own" software. You own a license to use the software. The contract you agree to when you open the box or click accept limits what you can and can't do with that license. (almost all have provisions against resale) It has been thus and will always be thus.

Nope. In fact there's legal precedent for any such clauses in a contract being null and void specifically because they violate the First-Sale Doctrine.

Same thing for music CDs. Video tapes...DVDs...Blu-Rays...so on and so forth.

Would it be OK with you if you bought a new house from a builder today, and then sold it five years from now...only to get a letter from the builder demanding 10% of your sale price? Or for you car? Your fridge? Your...anything?

Sorry pal. Supporting the XBO is nothing less than undermining one of the most important pillars of our economy.

Wrong, sorry... software, music, and i believe other media like movies have explicit exceptions in the law and that according to the 9th circuit corts all they have to do is indicate that the media is a license somewhere on the package and bam! you are a licenseee and not a owner and not protected by first sale and thus contractually obgligated by whatever reasonable terms the holder placed on the work.http://www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/kirtsaeng-...

First sale about limits on copyrighted works, most of your examples are not. However to take this to it's illogical conclusion. Lets say it was possible to copyright the design of a house and you bought a house like that and then because you owned a construction company decided you would make money by selling copies of that house. First sale would only protect you if you sold the copy you bought from the holder, but the copyright holder would be able to sue you over the sale of the copies you made without permission.

quote: Microsoft here has messed up royaly with this DRM scheme. IMHO it should have been whoever owns the disk can play the game and that the game can work from you account without the disk so long as you are connected and nobody else is using your disk

Well, it's more "Whoever buys the game, installs the disc and ties it to their account can play it anytime they want, with or without the disc, anywhere they go, and one of their ten designated "Family" members can play it at the same time as the original owner anytime another "Family" member isn't playing it.

The kinect thing doesn't bother me because, as I've said earlier here,a. you can turn it off

b. if you are really that paranoid, point it at the wall, ot put a towel over it/stick it in a drawer. It only needs to be connected, NOT on or "watching you"

c. (this COULD change but I doubt it, and if it does, see "b") My network traffic has not changed from before I owned my kinect(there are actually two in my house)to after I bought one. I simply opted out of everything there was to opt out that said "Send "xxx" from Kinect to "xxx".

quote: Kinect is very cool but not enough for me to purchase another console. Microsoft is also smartly going to release a PC version of the kinect so that Xbox One exclusivity would be questionable.

Same here... I have connect on my Xbox 360 and is very great device especially for my children, however not sure if the Kinect on the Xbox One is worth the loss of game titles I have purchased and the restrictions. At this point I would have to repurchase every game and find a privacy filter for the camera (IE. paper bag).

I have an HTPC and controlling/updating it is an issue from time to time so Skype in the living room through the X-Box One will be simplified. Not everyone wants to skype sitting behind their PC. Skype on the X-Box one in the living room is much more interactive and much more attractive to me.

My wife and kids love kinect and its a lot of fun at parties with friends over the local kids have dance parties as well.

The TV abilities of the X-Box one have to be seen to be appreciated its not simply a media streamer. Its way beyond that.

After the newness wore off the xbox in our house gathers dust mostly. We consume iTunes media and Netflix via AppleTV so the Xbox one doesn't add much. My kids have their own ipads so they can stream and facetime remote family members wherever they want. A centralized total media configuration is a dated concept in my house.

What i really need more is a private home cloud solution that would act as an intermediary between select cloud, streaming and remote backup services for purposes of caching and provide onsite backups i.e. what WHS should have been.

I think you're stretching a lot in your point. A majority of people don't want to spend 500$ on something they can easily get for cheaper.

Yea kinect is great for Dance Central and Just Dance, but what else? Anyone? No? Guys...?

NFL Exclusive? I was actually just searching for NFL fantasy football sites online.... they are so hard to find.

Get rid of the cable box? Really? I watch 2 things. Sports and HGTV (guilty pleasure). Neither would ever get streamed because the networks are too greedy. Their little slingbox without the actual sling interface is half assed.

If you want to game, get a PC. If you want a game console, get a PS4. If you want a game console/entertainment, build an HTPC with decent graphics. The XB1 is a flop in it's current form and doesn't really have an identity. It tries to be both, but is mediocre at best... all while being MORE expensive.

quote: Yea kinect is great for Dance Central and Just Dance, but what else? Anyone? No? Guys...?

Gunstringer, Star Wars Kinect, Kinect Party, Kinect Sports, Kinect Adventures, Wreckateer, Kinect Joy Ride, Zumba, Sorry, you looked like you were having trouble remembering titles, so I gave you a few off the top of my head :)

The Kinect is just an add-on for the 360, name an add-on that ever got mainstream focus on a console. Go Ahead, I'll wait............Oh, you can't? huh, imagine that, game companies don't wanna spend money developing for something that not everyone on the platform has.

If you can't follow the next part of my argument without me even saying it, don't bother to reply.

Definitely the new normal. It does make a lot of sense and though it's high for entry leaving many young kids out of th loop for a while it is still online with what adults expect to pay. Even an Xbox 360 with 250gb HD and Kinect runs $400.... So for $100 more you get a massively upgraded console, upgraded kinect 2, double the HD space, new controller, and a Bluray player (though this feature is completely useless for people like me who will never stick a BD movie in the drive and might even download all the content I purchase making any sort of disc drive just an added wasted cost).

So in the end comparing to the current generation it really isn't that expensive...

Me neither in fact I plan on owning both. But since I plan on owning an X-Box One and I pointed out the other options omitted in the comparison of the console beyond gaming there is hell to pay for my posts. Mix in Fud and Anti-Microsoft sentiment and the abilities of the X-Box one are lost.

Amazing how everyone completely forgot the way Sony works. Hey Linux is supported on PS3, Yes the PS3 is Backwards Compatible. How did those work out?

6-12 months after people buy a PS4 Sony will do some DRM content thing but it will be too late but Microsoft will catch hell for being up front about it.

Stop f%cking ignoring that. NOTHING about the XBO matters *in the slightest* other than that. If the XBO washed your car, cured cancer, and shat gold eggs it still would be a massive social disservice to buy one.

Read that f%cking article. Learn what the First-Sale Doctrine is. And then come back and tell us how it's a good idea to support any product or any company that would have anything to do with molesting the First-Sale Doctrine.

In the USA, as opposed to other (potentially more civilized) parts of the world, like Europe, digital downloads are *not* protected under First-Sale rights.

Europe is far more on the ball than the US is on this matter. One can hope that time will tell if the US catches up.

Aside from the fact that tens of millions of Americans have no access to reliable broadband, and therefore Steam (and all download/streaming things) is a non-starter for them, I don't like Steam precisely because those games you pay for are not protected under First-Sale.

But...it is what it is, and it is totally separate from the physical media model followed by consoles...and CDs, DVDs, etc.

LOL HAHA WOW..... Take a chill pill... Breath in... Now exhale...It's just a freaking entertainment console! I am a consumer, I am not trying to fight the system of protect any doctrine, unless of course that was the object of the game on my console. I don't care about "all of you" I care about me and the product that best fits me and my needs and if that means buying an XBO then that's what I am going to do but those are my priorities, yours clearly isn't to just buy a video game console your objective is to also keep your current rights protect other gamers as well etc etc. google glass right now doesn't allow you to even let someone borrow them let alone sell or give them away but if you don't like that then don't buy them but others don't care.

In the end I will say again I never said anything anti PS4 or pro XBO, I just made a price and feature comparison to the current gen 360 and how it isn't more expensive.

quote: Amazing how everyone completely forgot the way Sony works. Hey Linux is supported on PS3, Yes the PS3 is Backwards Compatible. How did those work out?

Or the one I love, that nearly cost me in excess of 10k. "We're sorry, SOE online services are down due to server issues, please bear with us" << we read that for nearly a month waiting for the EQ2 servers to come back up.

Then the bank called, someone was trying to access the credit card we used only for SOny, (Everquest 1, 2, and PSN subscriptions) and attempting to BUY A F***ING CAR WITH IT IN FRANCE.After some research, we found out that not only had Sony been hacked, and a SH*TLOAD of credit card and Identity information been stolen, but they were lying to us straight out. Called customer service, "No sir, this is just an outage, no credit card information was stolen"

And you people bitch about Microsoft being upfront about the fact that they believe the console industry is going "all digital"(as in, discless)?

i'd like to point out that even though the PS4 has 30% more power, this number is theoretical. i would also like to point out that ppl here seem to be under the assumption that just because the PS4 has 30% more, that means that it has enough. what if neither of them have enough? what difference does it make then? both systems could be underpowered but the Xbox One would have HTPC functionality which could make it a big success as the device for your living room while a PS4 might be left collecting dust.

What will actually happen is they will make all the games for the xbox 360 as both platforms are near identical other then gpu size, then they'll turn on extra fluff for PS4. So expect prettier explosions and slightly cleaner shadows - nothing major.

The lower graphics isn't the killer minus for me, it's the no used games since I buy a lot of games for kids second hand off ebay.

This is actually a little less likely than you might think. One method that's used for scaling is to build a "full version" and then cut it down until it runs well on lesser configurations.

What you're thinking of is the bottom-up method of first making sure the product runs on the "least common denominator" and then piling on premium features after the fact, which is only necessary when there's a giant and varying gap between the top and the bottom (PC).

That is not the case here. What we have here is similar to a PC game being made for only two video cards -- a $100 card and a $180 card. Just imagine how you think the development of that game would go. Oh, and I forgot to mention the $180 card is slightly easier to develop for in this metaphor.

PROTIP: The "least common denominator" development platform target is a myth.

Don't agree - the platforms are near identical - same cpu/memory/etc - all that's different is one can push a few more polygons. They'll build it for a single platform but just have 2 graphics settings.

Most companies will use a 3rd party engine that allows them to develop it once and then automatically spit out a version for each platform at minimal cost.

All the PS4 will have is slightly nicer fluff - they won't do anything game changing with a little extra gpu grunt - and that will mostly be there for fanboy bragging rights. I bet joe average console gamer won't notice or care.

sorry, i agree with dribble because 2 underpowered graphics cards will look about the same. if one card was considered powerful enough and one was underpowered i would agree with you but if ur basically telling me buying a budget videocard overclocked by the board manufacturer is gonna make my games look way better which simply isnt the case.

Are you saying the HD 7850 is underpowered? Because the GPU in the PS3 is more powerful than that before you consider the 7GB of usable VRAM and the console customization/efficiency advantage. Bottom line is I don't think you really realize what's going on here.

all reports ive read stated that the new consoles graphics would be based on GCN which is nothing more than an overall graphics architecture. i dont remember reading any actual specifications stating it would be more powerful than a radeon hd 7850. for what its worth though, a radeon hd 7850 might be considered acceptable for todays basic gamer needs but would be underpowered in the long run for 1080p gaming and beyond. so yes, i guess it is underpowered. there is also very little evidence that having 7gb of usable vram would translate into any appreciable performance gains because if it mattered that much why dont we see 7gb of dedicated graphics on highend GPUs for PCs?

umm, i dont know what ur trying to link me to... the AMD link shows me the marketing info to the 7850 which is fairly useless to me since i already know them and the PS4 page says that the graphics are based on AMD GCN which doesnt tell me anything specific either...

now ur next comment, i really dont care about the "last of us" and i dont wanna comment on what you think looks like "utter sex" but i guess i can tell you that it looks fine for PS3.

i guess your not much of a PC gamer if u think that the 7850 is a great card for 1080p gaming. there are very few modern games that can be set to max quality on the 7850 at that resolution. so for the millionth time, if neither system is fast enough to begin with, then you need other redeeming qualities to make your console better in "the long run".

It's not night and day, but as I've repeatedly said, it is more. And once again, there are customization and efficiency advantages for consoles that you have to take into account on top of that. Bottom line is the PS4 can render 1080p games just fine.

well, the 7870 does trump the 7850 by a bit more than the specification differences of the 7850 and the ps4 that you provided for me. i want to apologize as i wasnt sure what i was supposed to be looking for from ur links. i was actually hoping to see core speeds and such since i dont know how i would compare them based on stream processors and max memory bandwidth alone...

i dont doubt that you can game at 1080p on ur 7870 but 7850 would be more troublesome and as for the "customization and efficiency" advantages, that usually takes some time to achieve. if you want to talk about game development kits, Microsoft did a better job last gen so it would be safer to assume it would be this way this gen as well, although only time will tell.

I don't think you can judge consoles gaming performance based on included hardware from PC gaming point of view. Looking that way, PS3 and X360 should not have even remotely good looking games as they do, based on 256MB of system and 256MB of graphics RAM and 6+ years old graphics - and yet they do, if you consider Uncharted, Forza, Gran Tourismo, God of War, Halo titles... and many more.

There is tremendous level of optimization that goes into number of console titles that PC, unfortunately, can only dream of - and I'm telling this as both PC and console gamer. I have no doubt that premium exclusives for both consoles will stand against comparable PC games running on highest PC configurations, and that will stay true for a few years, IMHO.

quote: The lower graphics isn't the killer minus for me, it's the no used games since I buy a lot of games for kids second hand off ebay.

A lot of people who bring up the used games argument seem to be ignoring the possibility that the digital market can be advantageous. Sure you may not be able to buy a used copy off ebay, but with digital sales, the developers earn a larger portion of the income, which drives them to offer a larger number of sales. Steam is a great example. I have seen AAA games go on sale a mere month after release for 50% off (and not just because they suck or aren't selling well).

While there is a risk that it will backfire, you should really entertain the idea of this possibility. You may be surprised to see cheaper games with more sales, which will nullify the need for used games on the platform.